13 ms·

Both Windows 10 and Chrome OS are embracing the Linux kernel

95 points by indigodaddy 8y ago

tootie 8y ago
I'm a big fan of WSL and ChromeOS but how come nobody talks about the runaway success of OSS Unix on the desktop? That is by far the most successful at this point.
- fxfan 8y ago
  runaway success of oss Linux on the desktop? I'm a full time user but I can't tell you how much I hate he constant hardware issues. it's 2019 and I cannot hibernate or sleep my laptop reliably. the backlight doesn't work without fiddling with kernel Params.
  - blattimwind 8y ago
    > it's 2019 and I cannot hibernate or sleep my laptop reliably. Oh, no worries, it doesn't even work properly on Windows on half of the hardware.
    - cameronbrown 8y ago
      I've never really had Windows hibernation fail on a laptop or desktop for nearly a decade now. Inversely, Linux doesn't fail on hibernation, it's usually rock solid there, but has other problems, like battery not being picked up, or nonexistent power saving (probably because it thinks it's a desktop). Source: I like installing Linux on obscure things like Chromebooks and Windows 2-in-1s.
  - syshum 8y ago
    I manage a crap ton of windows systems... First thing i do is disable Hibernate on all of them. It does not work very well on windows either. So that is not a linux thing. Hibernate should simply not be a power state. Nor should sleep in IMO but I do keep that on in windows.. On and Off should be the 2 power states. People just putting their windows computers to sleep for months on end causes all kinds of weird shit to happen in windows >but I can't tell you how much I hate he constant hardware issues And you believe windows works perfectly on all hardware? I select my personal computers based on Linux hardware support and I have zero issues. Windows has all kind of wierd driver issues, random shit that happens with some hardware. Every issue you can come up with that linux has a problem around, i can find the same problem in windows. Welcome to General Computing
    - blattimwind 8y ago
      > People just putting their windows computers to sleep for months on end causes all kinds of weird shit to happen in windows Not just Windows, Linux/BSDs have problems, too, because just like Windows they tend to clean up temporary files only on reboot / relogon. Though Windows in particular had a number of issues where it would fill up the entire system drive, no matter how big, if you let it run long enough (related to not cleaning up extremely verbose log files and a couple problems with Windows Update). > Windows has all kind of wierd driver issues, random shit that happens with some hardware. Recent 1-2 years of nVidia drivers seem to generally lack in stability, with many people reporting frequent driver resets and outright game crashes esp. on Windows 7 and 8. Linux drivers aren't in a particularly convincing state, either. Issues with dis/reconnect displays, suspend/resume issues, 3D application hangs, hardware video crashing drivers (an issue on both OSes) etc. etc.
    - tracker1 8y ago
      I will suggest that Windows has far fewer problems... and while my next desktop (months away) will likely be Linux, it is definitely not nearly as friendly as either Windows or Mac for most users. Of course, if you don't manage your own computer and mostly run out of a browser, it doesn't matter nearly as much. It's significantly better today than a decade, or even 2 years ago. About every 2-3 years, I've run Linux as my main OS for anywhere from a month to I think 4 months being the longest. It's not stuck because invariably I hit a sticking point that just gets me to say "fuck it." Running a hackintosh for all its' faults is generally easier than running Linux as a desktop OS, which is a really sad statement. It's not that Windows doesn't have problems, it's that it has them a lot less frequently. I say this as someone who prefers to develop against Linux (mostly web ui and server backend, etc). I absolutely hate the frustrating windows-isms in Git bash. I find the WSL 1.x isn't sufficient, and the lack of properly performing volume mounts in Docker for Windows very frustrating to say the least. I, frankly, welcome a more transparent/fast/effective/complete option for linux software development in windows. What has come so far has allowed me to push it as an option moving forward that wouldn't otherwise be there.
  - tootie 8y ago
    I clearly didn't say Linux. I said Unix. OSX.
    - Redoubts 8y ago
      A lot of OSX is not OSS, so I wouldn’t be surprised by the confusion.
    - fxfan 8y ago
      Umm, which has even worse hardware support than Linux and if you want to buy supported hardware you pay a sheeepppreimum
- indigodaddy 8y ago
  Is it though? I would imagine there are far more general ChromeOS users than Linux desktop users. As far as ChromeOS users that make use of the Linux features vs Linux Desktop users, well, yeah that might be debatable there...
  - cameronbrown 8y ago
    Isn't this a good thing? Any step towards more Linux is a good thing. Now general Chrome OS users have access to the proper Linux ecosystem and also other ecosystems like Steam/GoG products.
    - indigodaddy 8y ago
      Agree, it's a good thing. I wasn't implying otherwise. I was just replying to OP's contention that their was more "OSS Unix" desktop users than WSL/ChromeOS users. I guess OP meant OS X by "OSS Unix" though.
  - tootie 8y ago
    Did everybody misread? I said Unix, not Linux. Meaning OSX.
    - detaro 8y ago
      Calling macOS an "OSS Unix" on the desktop is pushing it quite a bit. And approximately every discussion about WSL includes how it's about making Windows an alternative to macOS for developers.
smartmic 8y ago
Having a containerized Linux inside a non-free box provided by shareholder driven corporations is far away from the ideals and benefits I associate with GNU/Linux and FOSS. I know, this view may be too idealistic but I still feel it is not the right direction.
- tracker1 8y ago
  Now people who would otherwise be stuck writing windows-only systems have the option to use, develop against and deploy Linux based applications. I'd call that a win. More linux apps developed and migrated away from Windows-only, means Linux is a more viable option moving forward. Not all legacy software will be replaced/displaced or outright changed overnight. The all or nothing approach does everyone a disservice. Also, Linux WMs are not nearly as good as Windows or Mac although some are close.
overgard 8y ago
Maybe technologically, but not so much in spirit. The idea of "the year of the linux desktop", as I understand it, is that people en-mass get the benefits of free software and the free software desktop is a viable replacement for windows/macos. In this case, though, people are still using their same proprietary software... they just have slightly easier access to the free software world. That's certainly a benefit for a lot of people, but it's possibly a detriment to desktop linux for this reason: Other than freedom/privacy reasons, why would I switch from windows if I can already run most of the linux stack in it and not give up Adobe programs, games, etc.? This removes most of the pragmatic reasons for switching, so I'm mostly left with idealistic ones.
- smichel17 8y ago
  The pragmatic reason is the idealistic reason: control. It manifests itself in things like forced Windows updates, even if you're actually using the computer at the time.
  - judge2020 8y ago
    The issue with updates is that they sometimes need to be installed during restart, but many people (that I know) never power cycle their computer and then complain that it asked them to restart the computer while they were using it.
  - overgard 8y ago
    I wish that were enough, but even though having my computer restart when I don't want it to is annoying and microsoft's forced updates infuriate me, at the end of the day I use my computer to get work done and using linux would really make that a lot harder, unfortunately.
  - zvrba 8y ago
    > even if you're actually using the computer at the time. ?? Windows 10 pops up a "schedule updates" dialog when there's an update to install. And when the time comes, I can still postpone it.
- 8y ago
pcr910303 8y ago
Looks like everyone dislikes the fact that Linux is only popular on an `non-free' Operating System; But I consider that also as a success to Linux... as that means that people who feel like home at Windows can also develop Linux Software, and that's the big deal. It's something like Emacs for Windows and Emacs for macOS, allowing gcc running on other (non-free) platforms, because they show other people how free software `tastes'. Additionally, this makes Microsoft directly benefit from the Linux kernel and the software ecosystem; which will motivate Microsoft to invest resources on Linux.
- ekianjo 8y ago
  > But I consider that also as a success to Linux... as that means that people who feel like home at Windows can also develop Linux Software, and that's the big deal. The problem is that it does nothing to ensure the viability of Linux as a Desktop alternative. The more people will feel at home "in Windows" even to develop Linux headless applications, the less incentive there will be to run Linux Desktop. It might very well end up being a net negative in terms of alternatives for the end user.
  - pcr910303 8y ago
    What is exactly Linux Desktop? Isn't Linux Desktop = Linux Kernel + Mostly Free Software? If you run a (free) Linux kernel and (free) Linux software, why can't that be considered as Linux Desktop? What is the downside of an additionally-running Windows kernel? Is it the usual everything-should-be-free-and-non-free-is-evil paradigm?
    - shrimp_emoji 8y ago
      >What is the downside of an additionally-running Windows kernel? - You must pay hundreds of dollars to Microsoft - You must tacitly agree with Microsoft's ToS/EULA - You must endure whatever Microsoft decides you need to (surveillance, forced reboots, etc.) In short, you're under corporate hegemony. Game-theoretically, it's pretty sad for you as the user[0]. You're shackled to this company not even due to the superiority of its products but the massive coordination problem that is that people collectively settled on an inertial default and the entire [consumer-facing side of the] industry sclerotically built up around that default. >Is it the usual everything-should-be-free-and-non-free-is-evil paradigm? TL;DR yes >What is exactly Linux Desktop? Isn't Linux Desktop = Linux Kernel + Mostly Free Software? I use tons of non-free software on Linux though (games, cloud software, etc.). To me, "Linux Desktop" means "desktop running a Linux distro". I assume parent's saying, "If people who would otherwise be burdened with dual-booting into Linux to do something like use Bash can now use Bash in Windows or Chrome OS, they'll stay on Windows and Chrome OS instead of Linux." ... I guess that's a valid anxiety. But if developers are encouraged by this to develop stuff that works on Linux because it'll now somehow work in Windows, to me that's a win -- Linux gets more dev-incentive. 0: https://youtu.be/pgY7qYaoMWQ https://youtu.be/pgY7qYaoMWQ
tyingq 8y ago
I'm curious what the timeframe is for Fuschia to displace Linux in Android, and then maybe ChromeOS.
- The_rationalist 8y ago
  Lel zircon will never replace Linux, Google is acting retarded here, they have not the ressources to make zircon competitive with Linux.
swedish_mafia 8y ago
Will Microsoft "Linux kernel" devs influence Linux roadmap?
- jononor 8y ago
  Linux never really had a traditional roadmap, it just is the sum of all contributions, mediated by what subsystem maintainers and Linus will accept for merging. So sure, Microsoft devs will influence Linux development just like the other big contributors. Google, Oracle, RedHat, Intel, et.c.
ekianjo 8y ago
> Get this: Chromebooks also support Android apps, as Google’s mobile operating system is also built on Linux. Which means that developers could run software from three different operating systems at the same time on a Chromebook. No, two only. ChromeOS runs on the Linux kernel and the rest was merely a thin web client. ChromeOS apps are simply offline web applications.
- kyrra 8y ago
  Crostini is The Linux subsystem/container for chrome OS. They have put a very large amount of effort to making this work well (mainly around security so Linux apps can't break the security guarantees that chrome OS provides). They are working exposing USB to it, could aid in Android development. https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/docs/+/master/containers_and_vms.md https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/docs/+/master/c... https://betanews.com/2019/04/13/usb-support-linux-apps-chrome-os/ https://betanews.com/2019/04/13/usb-support-linux-apps-chrom...
  - tracker1 8y ago
    I'd love to see ChromiumOS expanded into a much larger general Linux platform... it has the best chance of a real Linux Desktop environment for the masses. I don't know that it will ever really happen though. Canonical could certainly move in that direction for their chosen window manager and ui shell.
williesleg 8y ago
Fake news. Microsoft deploying the linux kernel just means they're running it in a virtual machine within Windows. They aren't switching to the Linux kernel. NBD.
ape4 8y ago
It might unify development more. Now all developers (Linux, Windows, Chrome, Mac) have access to the same command line tools.
mimixco 8y ago
I predict that MS will be the ones to finally bring about a Linux desktop with mass market adoption. They'll do it by making it look like Windows, act like Windows, work with Windows files, and run Windows apps through emulation or virtualization. It's pretty brilliant, really, because it solves both problems: the user doesn't have to change anything and the IT department gets the open source foundation they want.
- kumarvvr 8y ago
  As of now, Microsoft is only including Linux to get developers to start using windows for development of cloud apps and services. So Linux in windows, presently, is just the kernel and other essentials, that enable developers to develop and test command line applications. P.S : By windows, I mean the Microsoft cloud ecosystem, not windows OS per se.
  - indigodaddy 8y ago
    Agree with this sentiment.
- ripdog 8y ago
  Yep, absolutely. It may not happen next year, but it will happen. The point at which this move became obvious is when they gave up on EdgeHTML and switched to Blink. Just like web engines, operating systems are hard. They require a lot of experienced, highly paid engineers to keep working at the leading edge of tech. When you have a free, open source, collaboratively developed competitor at a similar or better level of tech as your product, why bother spending all that money on making your own? Just use Linux! Basing Windows on Linux means MS gets the benefit of thousands of contributors from other companies and individual users. Their users don't care because Word and Photoshop still run fine on a light virtualization layer, and for less involved apps a MS-supported Wine will run them with 0 performance loss. Hardware vendors will initially be unhappy, as they may have to rewrite their drivers for Linux, but in the longer term it is a great advantage to them - a single driver could power their hardware in literally every computer on earth except macs. That's an unparalled level of compatibility we've never seen before. Windows would also run 100% flawlessly on other CPU archs. It would be trivial to port Windows to ARM and take advantage of the laptop-class ARM chips coming out recently. Old x86 programs run happily in the virtualized environment, and everything else is probably open source. (Admittedly a lot of companies will still ship closed source apps for Windows, so they will have to port in-house). I think UWP apps are already arch-independant and run on NET, which is already open source and I think runs on ARM. I think the business case for WindowsLinux over plain Linux would still come from the NT kernel and userland, though. The VM delivered to every WindowsLinux user would still be a big blob of proprietary code, running on an OSS VM. Microsoft would be charging enterprise for a guaranteed-flawless and seamless way of running their legacy and big commercial apps on WindowsLinux. No need for a 'virtual desktop', all apps will run with no window decorations on the native desktop and be decorated natively. The VM would be entirely invisible. Perhaps even the GUI could be drawn outside the VM, with drawing/GPU commands going to virtual components inside the VM which redirect them outside.
gprasanth 8y ago
Just tried getting docker with wsl + Ubuntu to work on windows 10 yesterday, and it was a horrible, horrible experience. Couldn't get it to work in the end. Made me realise how peaceful macOS with brew really is. Even getting zsh to work with hyper properly was super painful. If you ask me Linux on windows is not usable yet. Checkback in an year?
- judge2020 8y ago
  It's not as seamless as docker on Mac or Docker CE on Linux, but it doesn't take much to get docker working in WSL: https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/setting-up-docker-for-windows-and-wsl-to-work-flawlessly https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/setting-up-docker-for-windows...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- uponcoffee 8y ago
  Have you tried using pengwin[[1]](https://github.com/WhitewaterFoundry/Pengwin https://github.com/WhitewaterFoundry/Pengwin)? I got the docker client working for windows in just a few keystrokes last night. [1] [https://github.com/WhitewaterFoundry/Pengwinhttps://](github.com/WhitewaterFoundry/Pengwin) https://github.com/WhitewaterFoundry/Pengwinhttps://](github...
- tracker1 8y ago
  WSL2 should be available soon and will be a better experience... I've just been running Docker for Windows and using the bash that comes with Git for Windows. It is not great, but the best option(s) I've used so far. edit: current Docker for Windows does not use REAL volume mounts, don't use it for any live databases in containers, it's good enough for a backup target volume, but live data is too fidgety.
kumarvvr 8y ago
I don't think this is a good thing at all. The more Microsoft embraces Linux and makes it work seamlessly in Windows, the more developers are wont to use Windows, rather than Linux as their primary OS. If not all, this will at-least chip away a good portion of existing developers and most importantly, upcoming developers. This might lead to Linux being relegated to the background, permanently killing the Linux on Desktop dream.
- iamgopal 8y ago
  You are predicting classic MS strategy, but I think since money is moving away from desktop computing, MS not going to actively pursuing the same. May be indirectly.
- writepub 8y ago
  This is indeed likely if windows GUI is significantly more stable, reliable and polished than the Linux GUI, and related GUI apps. What I'm saying is - for Linux desktop to pose any real threat to windows, it needs to ship a GUI/Desktop comparable in quality, stability, app and driver ecosystem that rivals windows. That ship sailed 20 years ago, when philosophical infighting trumped user empathy.
- tracker1 8y ago
  Currently, I'm planning to refresh my desktop (5yo now) when the Zen 2 chips drop. I've been running hackintosh for the past 2 years, and been on a combination of Windows, Linux and Mac regularly for a long time. Most non-gui unix software works on Mac. Does that also detract from Linux? The fact is, people will make pragmatic choices. MOST software these days is delivered online (public or private) via a web browser. People developing that software sometimes have to work on legacy applications they MUST run on Windows. Would you rather take Linux away as even an option? How do you expect people to move away from Windows if they can't support their legacy software? They'll just develop more Windows-only software in that case. At LEAST this gives a clear path forward. And frankly, compared to Windows and Mac, all Linux desktop managers suck. Is say this as someone who pushes for Linux pretty hard in the workplace, has worked in linux environments and my next desktop probably will be Linux. My current work environment has historically been Windows centric. The current project I'm on has been a hard push towards .Net Core (over Framework, which is Windows only) for cross-platform capability. I have made most of the CI/CD and local development workflows work with Docker (as a start). If Linux/Docker etc didn't work on Windows, guess what... That software would have been written Windows-only.
naveen99 8y ago
The remaining things I wait for on windows: built in gpu pass through from windows to linux and enabling wsl on enterprise licenses by default.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

95 points by indigodaddy 8y ago

I'm a big fan of WSL and ChromeOS but how come nobody talks about the runaway success of OSS Unix on the desktop? That is by far the most successful at this point.

fxfan 8y ago
runaway success of oss Linux on the desktop? I'm a full time user but I can't tell you how much I hate he constant hardware issues. it's 2019 and I cannot hibernate or sleep my laptop reliably. the backlight doesn't work without fiddling with kernel Params.
- blattimwind 8y ago
  > it's 2019 and I cannot hibernate or sleep my laptop reliably. Oh, no worries, it doesn't even work properly on Windows on half of the hardware.
  - cameronbrown 8y ago
    I've never really had Windows hibernation fail on a laptop or desktop for nearly a decade now. Inversely, Linux doesn't fail on hibernation, it's usually rock solid there, but has other problems, like battery not being picked up, or nonexistent power saving (probably because it thinks it's a desktop). Source: I like installing Linux on obscure things like Chromebooks and Windows 2-in-1s.
- syshum 8y ago
  I manage a crap ton of windows systems... First thing i do is disable Hibernate on all of them. It does not work very well on windows either. So that is not a linux thing. Hibernate should simply not be a power state. Nor should sleep in IMO but I do keep that on in windows.. On and Off should be the 2 power states. People just putting their windows computers to sleep for months on end causes all kinds of weird shit to happen in windows >but I can't tell you how much I hate he constant hardware issues And you believe windows works perfectly on all hardware? I select my personal computers based on Linux hardware support and I have zero issues. Windows has all kind of wierd driver issues, random shit that happens with some hardware. Every issue you can come up with that linux has a problem around, i can find the same problem in windows. Welcome to General Computing
  - blattimwind 8y ago
    > People just putting their windows computers to sleep for months on end causes all kinds of weird shit to happen in windows Not just Windows, Linux/BSDs have problems, too, because just like Windows they tend to clean up temporary files only on reboot / relogon. Though Windows in particular had a number of issues where it would fill up the entire system drive, no matter how big, if you let it run long enough (related to not cleaning up extremely verbose log files and a couple problems with Windows Update). > Windows has all kind of wierd driver issues, random shit that happens with some hardware. Recent 1-2 years of nVidia drivers seem to generally lack in stability, with many people reporting frequent driver resets and outright game crashes esp. on Windows 7 and 8. Linux drivers aren't in a particularly convincing state, either. Issues with dis/reconnect displays, suspend/resume issues, 3D application hangs, hardware video crashing drivers (an issue on both OSes) etc. etc.
  - tracker1 8y ago
    I will suggest that Windows has far fewer problems... and while my next desktop (months away) will likely be Linux, it is definitely not nearly as friendly as either Windows or Mac for most users. Of course, if you don't manage your own computer and mostly run out of a browser, it doesn't matter nearly as much. It's significantly better today than a decade, or even 2 years ago. About every 2-3 years, I've run Linux as my main OS for anywhere from a month to I think 4 months being the longest. It's not stuck because invariably I hit a sticking point that just gets me to say "fuck it." Running a hackintosh for all its' faults is generally easier than running Linux as a desktop OS, which is a really sad statement. It's not that Windows doesn't have problems, it's that it has them a lot less frequently. I say this as someone who prefers to develop against Linux (mostly web ui and server backend, etc). I absolutely hate the frustrating windows-isms in Git bash. I find the WSL 1.x isn't sufficient, and the lack of properly performing volume mounts in Docker for Windows very frustrating to say the least. I, frankly, welcome a more transparent/fast/effective/complete option for linux software development in windows. What has come so far has allowed me to push it as an option moving forward that wouldn't otherwise be there.
- tootie 8y ago
  I clearly didn't say Linux. I said Unix. OSX.
  - Redoubts 8y ago
    A lot of OSX is not OSS, so I wouldn’t be surprised by the confusion.
  - fxfan 8y ago
    Umm, which has even worse hardware support than Linux and if you want to buy supported hardware you pay a sheeepppreimum
indigodaddy 8y ago
Is it though? I would imagine there are far more general ChromeOS users than Linux desktop users. As far as ChromeOS users that make use of the Linux features vs Linux Desktop users, well, yeah that might be debatable there...
- cameronbrown 8y ago
  Isn't this a good thing? Any step towards more Linux is a good thing. Now general Chrome OS users have access to the proper Linux ecosystem and also other ecosystems like Steam/GoG products.
  - indigodaddy 8y ago
    Agree, it's a good thing. I wasn't implying otherwise. I was just replying to OP's contention that their was more "OSS Unix" desktop users than WSL/ChromeOS users. I guess OP meant OS X by "OSS Unix" though.
- tootie 8y ago
  Did everybody misread? I said Unix, not Linux. Meaning OSX.
  - detaro 8y ago
    Calling macOS an "OSS Unix" on the desktop is pushing it quite a bit. And approximately every discussion about WSL includes how it's about making Windows an alternative to macOS for developers.

smartmic 8y ago

Having a containerized Linux inside a non-free box provided by shareholder driven corporations is far away from the ideals and benefits I associate with GNU/Linux and FOSS. I know, this view may be too idealistic but I still feel it is not the right direction.

tracker1 8y ago
Now people who would otherwise be stuck writing windows-only systems have the option to use, develop against and deploy Linux based applications. I'd call that a win. More linux apps developed and migrated away from Windows-only, means Linux is a more viable option moving forward. Not all legacy software will be replaced/displaced or outright changed overnight. The all or nothing approach does everyone a disservice. Also, Linux WMs are not nearly as good as Windows or Mac although some are close.

overgard 8y ago

Maybe technologically, but not so much in spirit. The idea of "the year of the linux desktop", as I understand it, is that people en-mass get the benefits of free software and the free software desktop is a viable replacement for windows/macos. In this case, though, people are still using their same proprietary software... they just have slightly easier access to the free software world. That's certainly a benefit for a lot of people, but it's possibly a detriment to desktop linux for this reason: Other than freedom/privacy reasons, why would I switch from windows if I can already run most of the linux stack in it and not give up Adobe programs, games, etc.? This removes most of the pragmatic reasons for switching, so I'm mostly left with idealistic ones.

smichel17 8y ago
The pragmatic reason is the idealistic reason: control. It manifests itself in things like forced Windows updates, even if you're actually using the computer at the time.
- judge2020 8y ago
  The issue with updates is that they sometimes need to be installed during restart, but many people (that I know) never power cycle their computer and then complain that it asked them to restart the computer while they were using it.
- overgard 8y ago
  I wish that were enough, but even though having my computer restart when I don't want it to is annoying and microsoft's forced updates infuriate me, at the end of the day I use my computer to get work done and using linux would really make that a lot harder, unfortunately.
- zvrba 8y ago
  > even if you're actually using the computer at the time. ?? Windows 10 pops up a "schedule updates" dialog when there's an update to install. And when the time comes, I can still postpone it.
8y ago

pcr910303 8y ago

Looks like everyone dislikes the fact that Linux is only popular on an `non-free' Operating System; But I consider that also as a success to Linux... as that means that people who feel like home at Windows can also develop Linux Software, and that's the big deal. It's something like Emacs for Windows and Emacs for macOS, allowing gcc running on other (non-free) platforms, because they show other people how free software `tastes'. Additionally, this makes Microsoft directly benefit from the Linux kernel and the software ecosystem; which will motivate Microsoft to invest resources on Linux.

ekianjo 8y ago
> But I consider that also as a success to Linux... as that means that people who feel like home at Windows can also develop Linux Software, and that's the big deal. The problem is that it does nothing to ensure the viability of Linux as a Desktop alternative. The more people will feel at home "in Windows" even to develop Linux headless applications, the less incentive there will be to run Linux Desktop. It might very well end up being a net negative in terms of alternatives for the end user.
- pcr910303 8y ago
  What is exactly Linux Desktop? Isn't Linux Desktop = Linux Kernel + Mostly Free Software? If you run a (free) Linux kernel and (free) Linux software, why can't that be considered as Linux Desktop? What is the downside of an additionally-running Windows kernel? Is it the usual everything-should-be-free-and-non-free-is-evil paradigm?
  - shrimp_emoji 8y ago
    >What is the downside of an additionally-running Windows kernel? - You must pay hundreds of dollars to Microsoft - You must tacitly agree with Microsoft's ToS/EULA - You must endure whatever Microsoft decides you need to (surveillance, forced reboots, etc.) In short, you're under corporate hegemony. Game-theoretically, it's pretty sad for you as the user[0]. You're shackled to this company not even due to the superiority of its products but the massive coordination problem that is that people collectively settled on an inertial default and the entire [consumer-facing side of the] industry sclerotically built up around that default. >Is it the usual everything-should-be-free-and-non-free-is-evil paradigm? TL;DR yes >What is exactly Linux Desktop? Isn't Linux Desktop = Linux Kernel + Mostly Free Software? I use tons of non-free software on Linux though (games, cloud software, etc.). To me, "Linux Desktop" means "desktop running a Linux distro". I assume parent's saying, "If people who would otherwise be burdened with dual-booting into Linux to do something like use Bash can now use Bash in Windows or Chrome OS, they'll stay on Windows and Chrome OS instead of Linux." ... I guess that's a valid anxiety. But if developers are encouraged by this to develop stuff that works on Linux because it'll now somehow work in Windows, to me that's a win -- Linux gets more dev-incentive. 0: https://youtu.be/pgY7qYaoMWQ https://youtu.be/pgY7qYaoMWQ

tyingq 8y ago

I'm curious what the timeframe is for Fuschia to displace Linux in Android, and then maybe ChromeOS.

The_rationalist 8y ago
Lel zircon will never replace Linux, Google is acting retarded here, they have not the ressources to make zircon competitive with Linux.

swedish_mafia 8y ago

Will Microsoft "Linux kernel" devs influence Linux roadmap?

jononor 8y ago
Linux never really had a traditional roadmap, it just is the sum of all contributions, mediated by what subsystem maintainers and Linus will accept for merging. So sure, Microsoft devs will influence Linux development just like the other big contributors. Google, Oracle, RedHat, Intel, et.c.

ekianjo 8y ago

> Get this: Chromebooks also support Android apps, as Google’s mobile operating system is also built on Linux. Which means that developers could run software from three different operating systems at the same time on a Chromebook. No, two only. ChromeOS runs on the Linux kernel and the rest was merely a thin web client. ChromeOS apps are simply offline web applications.

kyrra 8y ago
Crostini is The Linux subsystem/container for chrome OS. They have put a very large amount of effort to making this work well (mainly around security so Linux apps can't break the security guarantees that chrome OS provides). They are working exposing USB to it, could aid in Android development. https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/docs/+/master/containers_and_vms.md https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/docs/+/master/c... https://betanews.com/2019/04/13/usb-support-linux-apps-chrome-os/ https://betanews.com/2019/04/13/usb-support-linux-apps-chrom...
- tracker1 8y ago
  I'd love to see ChromiumOS expanded into a much larger general Linux platform... it has the best chance of a real Linux Desktop environment for the masses. I don't know that it will ever really happen though. Canonical could certainly move in that direction for their chosen window manager and ui shell.

williesleg 8y ago

Fake news. Microsoft deploying the linux kernel just means they're running it in a virtual machine within Windows. They aren't switching to the Linux kernel. NBD.

ape4 8y ago

It might unify development more. Now all developers (Linux, Windows, Chrome, Mac) have access to the same command line tools.

mimixco 8y ago

I predict that MS will be the ones to finally bring about a Linux desktop with mass market adoption. They'll do it by making it look like Windows, act like Windows, work with Windows files, and run Windows apps through emulation or virtualization. It's pretty brilliant, really, because it solves both problems: the user doesn't have to change anything and the IT department gets the open source foundation they want.

kumarvvr 8y ago
As of now, Microsoft is only including Linux to get developers to start using windows for development of cloud apps and services. So Linux in windows, presently, is just the kernel and other essentials, that enable developers to develop and test command line applications. P.S : By windows, I mean the Microsoft cloud ecosystem, not windows OS per se.
- indigodaddy 8y ago
  Agree with this sentiment.
ripdog 8y ago
Yep, absolutely. It may not happen next year, but it will happen. The point at which this move became obvious is when they gave up on EdgeHTML and switched to Blink. Just like web engines, operating systems are hard. They require a lot of experienced, highly paid engineers to keep working at the leading edge of tech. When you have a free, open source, collaboratively developed competitor at a similar or better level of tech as your product, why bother spending all that money on making your own? Just use Linux! Basing Windows on Linux means MS gets the benefit of thousands of contributors from other companies and individual users. Their users don't care because Word and Photoshop still run fine on a light virtualization layer, and for less involved apps a MS-supported Wine will run them with 0 performance loss. Hardware vendors will initially be unhappy, as they may have to rewrite their drivers for Linux, but in the longer term it is a great advantage to them - a single driver could power their hardware in literally every computer on earth except macs. That's an unparalled level of compatibility we've never seen before. Windows would also run 100% flawlessly on other CPU archs. It would be trivial to port Windows to ARM and take advantage of the laptop-class ARM chips coming out recently. Old x86 programs run happily in the virtualized environment, and everything else is probably open source. (Admittedly a lot of companies will still ship closed source apps for Windows, so they will have to port in-house). I think UWP apps are already arch-independant and run on NET, which is already open source and I think runs on ARM. I think the business case for WindowsLinux over plain Linux would still come from the NT kernel and userland, though. The VM delivered to every WindowsLinux user would still be a big blob of proprietary code, running on an OSS VM. Microsoft would be charging enterprise for a guaranteed-flawless and seamless way of running their legacy and big commercial apps on WindowsLinux. No need for a 'virtual desktop', all apps will run with no window decorations on the native desktop and be decorated natively. The VM would be entirely invisible. Perhaps even the GUI could be drawn outside the VM, with drawing/GPU commands going to virtual components inside the VM which redirect them outside.

gprasanth 8y ago

Just tried getting docker with wsl + Ubuntu to work on windows 10 yesterday, and it was a horrible, horrible experience. Couldn't get it to work in the end. Made me realise how peaceful macOS with brew really is. Even getting zsh to work with hyper properly was super painful. If you ask me Linux on windows is not usable yet. Checkback in an year?

judge2020 8y ago
It's not as seamless as docker on Mac or Docker CE on Linux, but it doesn't take much to get docker working in WSL: https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/setting-up-docker-for-windows-and-wsl-to-work-flawlessly https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/setting-up-docker-for-windows...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
uponcoffee 8y ago
Have you tried using pengwin[[1]](https://github.com/WhitewaterFoundry/Pengwin https://github.com/WhitewaterFoundry/Pengwin)? I got the docker client working for windows in just a few keystrokes last night. [1] [https://github.com/WhitewaterFoundry/Pengwinhttps://](github.com/WhitewaterFoundry/Pengwin) https://github.com/WhitewaterFoundry/Pengwinhttps://](github...
tracker1 8y ago
WSL2 should be available soon and will be a better experience... I've just been running Docker for Windows and using the bash that comes with Git for Windows. It is not great, but the best option(s) I've used so far. edit: current Docker for Windows does not use REAL volume mounts, don't use it for any live databases in containers, it's good enough for a backup target volume, but live data is too fidgety.

kumarvvr 8y ago

I don't think this is a good thing at all. The more Microsoft embraces Linux and makes it work seamlessly in Windows, the more developers are wont to use Windows, rather than Linux as their primary OS. If not all, this will at-least chip away a good portion of existing developers and most importantly, upcoming developers. This might lead to Linux being relegated to the background, permanently killing the Linux on Desktop dream.

iamgopal 8y ago
You are predicting classic MS strategy, but I think since money is moving away from desktop computing, MS not going to actively pursuing the same. May be indirectly.
writepub 8y ago
This is indeed likely if windows GUI is significantly more stable, reliable and polished than the Linux GUI, and related GUI apps. What I'm saying is - for Linux desktop to pose any real threat to windows, it needs to ship a GUI/Desktop comparable in quality, stability, app and driver ecosystem that rivals windows. That ship sailed 20 years ago, when philosophical infighting trumped user empathy.
tracker1 8y ago
Currently, I'm planning to refresh my desktop (5yo now) when the Zen 2 chips drop. I've been running hackintosh for the past 2 years, and been on a combination of Windows, Linux and Mac regularly for a long time. Most non-gui unix software works on Mac. Does that also detract from Linux? The fact is, people will make pragmatic choices. MOST software these days is delivered online (public or private) via a web browser. People developing that software sometimes have to work on legacy applications they MUST run on Windows. Would you rather take Linux away as even an option? How do you expect people to move away from Windows if they can't support their legacy software? They'll just develop more Windows-only software in that case. At LEAST this gives a clear path forward. And frankly, compared to Windows and Mac, all Linux desktop managers suck. Is say this as someone who pushes for Linux pretty hard in the workplace, has worked in linux environments and my next desktop probably will be Linux. My current work environment has historically been Windows centric. The current project I'm on has been a hard push towards .Net Core (over Framework, which is Windows only) for cross-platform capability. I have made most of the CI/CD and local development workflows work with Docker (as a start). If Linux/Docker etc didn't work on Windows, guess what... That software would have been written Windows-only.

naveen99 8y ago

The remaining things I wait for on windows: built in gpu pass through from windows to linux and enabling wsl on enterprise licenses by default.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]